Image from Google Jackets

Henry Boot Construction (UK) Ltd v Malmaison Hotel (Manchester) Ltd

Series: Weekly Law Reports ; [2000] 3 WLR 1824-1841(18)Publication details: 2000Subject(s): Summary: CA 28 July 2000. A dispute between H and M had been referred to an arbitrator, who made an interim award to M. H's appeal under the Arbitration Act 1996 s69(1) was rejected by the HC., which also refused permission to appeal under the Arbitration Act 1996 s69(8). H then applied to the CA for leave to appeal against the judge's decision to dismiss their appeal against the arbitrator's interim award or the judges refusal to grant permission. This was on the grounds that the judge had failed to address fully the true interpretation of the JCT Standard Form of Building Contract 1980 with Quantities and had wrongly held that matters raised in H's statement of defence and counterclaim were within the scope of the reference to arbitration. The application was refused on the grounds that the under Arbitration Act 1996 s69(8) the CA had no jurisdiction to grant permission or review a refusal by the HC or CC, and that the Access to Justice Act 1999 s55 did not impliedly repeal this. "Held": application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

CA 28 July 2000. A dispute between H and M had been referred to an arbitrator, who made an interim award to M. H's appeal under the Arbitration Act 1996 s69(1) was rejected by the HC., which also refused permission to appeal under the Arbitration Act 1996 s69(8). H then applied to the CA for leave to appeal against the judge's decision to dismiss their appeal against the arbitrator's interim award or the judges refusal to grant permission. This was on the grounds that the judge had failed to address fully the true interpretation of the JCT Standard Form of Building Contract 1980 with Quantities and had wrongly held that matters raised in H's statement of defence and counterclaim were within the scope of the reference to arbitration. The application was refused on the grounds that the under Arbitration Act 1996 s69(8) the CA had no jurisdiction to grant permission or review a refusal by the HC or CC, and that the Access to Justice Act 1999 s55 did not impliedly repeal this. "Held": application dismissed for want of jurisdiction.